Election 2010: A Standard for Conservatives, Tea Party Patriots, and Commonsense Democrats

On Candidates


For Starters, I don’t believe that Tea Party members and other conservative/libertarian grassroots organizations should spawn off into a third party movement; going the third party route would split the Conservative/Republican/Libertarian vote and by default re-elect Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House and Harry Reid as Senate Majority Leader. Conservatives and Libertarians, those who seek commonsense solutions to this nation’s problems, should seek to enter the Republican Party, the Original home of Conservatism, and retake it. In Republican Primaries, conservatives should throw their support behind candidates that advocate the principles of limited government and fiscal sanity at both the State and Federal level. Conservatives, Tea Party Patriots, and Commonsense Reagan democrats must remember that although Republicans have made mistakes in the past, they are the country’s only hope at the moment in turning back the tide on President Obama’s Statists agenda. When Republicans become RINO’s, republicans in name only, conservatives should run primary challengers against them; if the conservative wins the party’s conservatism will be strengthened. Even if the RINO wins the primary, the conservative running against him forces him to the Right on many positions away; a perfect example of this would be John McCain’s new found conservative stance in his primary fight with J.D. Hayworth.



On Energy and Jobs Policy


Conservatives should develop a platform by which to judge candidates running for elected office; the platform should include our positions on a variety of policy issues. On energy the concerned Americans should endorse an energy strategy, both national and at the state level, that seeks to cut our dependence on foreign energy sources by more than half. A promising reform would be to transform the way we use energy in America. Today, depending on the estimate, the US spends around $400 billion a year to import energy from nations that don’t have our best interests at heart. The United States, particularly States like Pennsylvania and Alaska are rich in domestic energy resources like oil, natural gas, and coal and by unleashing those resources the US could unleash a booming economic recovery. Candidates running for state wide offices and seeking grassroots conservative support should embrace a plan in which business tax rates are dramatically cut from their current rates; the state of Pennsylvania has a Business tax of nearly 10%, almost double the rate of Florida. The State of Florida has a flat corporate tax rate of 5.5%, providing more incentive for business development within that state and as a result Florida was able to attract a lot of new businesses to the state. Once tax rates are cut, energy rich states would have put themselves on the path to major investment in the state’s natural resources by investors looking to help America diversify its energy portfolio and lessen our dependence on foreign energy. Oil Tycoon Boone Pickens devised a plan in which America would use it vast natural gas resources to fuel and heat its vehicles and homes. For example, there are 18 million tractor trailers (trucks) traveling up and down the interstates of America delivering goods and services; these huge trucks use diesel fuel. Pickens’ estimates that by converting these trucks from Diesel (imported energy) to Natural Gas (domestic), the US could reduce its energy imports by half, bringing that money back home to reinvest in America. Pennsylvania, for example, could embark on a natural gas revolution, bringing hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue to the state and employing thousands; Pennsylvania could become a catalyst for the Nation on true energy Independence. Nationally, Conservatives should seek and embrace candidates that pledge changing the way this country uses energy by diversifying into Natural Gas, Liquefied Coal, and Nuclear power.



On The Economy


Conservatives and Tea Party activists should embrace a policy stance of across the board tax cut for individuals and businesses, allowing individuals and businesses to keep more of what they earn. State and Federal officials should convene a series of meetings with leading Business owners and Business Associations to discuss the best way forward on job creation. Candidates should pledge to seek a major reduction in corporate and investment tax rates; these tax reductions should be temporary and only re-enacted if credible job gains are posted. Tax cuts are great, but all tax cuts must be accompanied by spending cuts as well; we can no longer afford to cut taxing while increasing government spending; this leads to deficits. Those running for Congress should pledge to support conservative measures for cutting federal spending. There are those who advocate cutting federal spending in half, and under normal circumstances I’d agree with that. But in understanding our dire financial situation I feel deeper cuts are necessary; however cutting spending in half is a productive start. There are measures currently being presented by Republican members of the House in which spending is capped at 20% of GDP; once again good start but capping spending at 17-18% would be better. Candidates should advocate providing tax incentives to businesses and investors willing to invest in the Manufacturing business. We need to revive manufacturing jobs in America. We should support candidates who believe in the 10 Amendment; candidates who advocate the States taking a lead role in areas such as education, transportation, emergency management, and agriculture; this would drastically reduce the need for federal spending in these areas, saving the American Taxpayer billions.



On Entitlements


The Tea Party and other concerned Commonsense America should support candidates who tell the truth about the state of our entitlement programs and who are willing to make the tough decisions regarding reform. The current recession will only pale in comparison to the coming entitlement crisis due to hit this country in just a few short years. The United States has a national debt of more than $12 Trillion and growing and on top of that staggering figure is one even direr. The WWII generation produced the Baby Boom generation, those born between WWII and the early 1960s, and this population of over 70 million Americans is beginning to retire in record numbers; the tidal wave of retirees is due to put severe strain on both Social Security and Medicare. For the next two decades, 10,000 baby boomers will retire everyday leaving the US taxpayer on the hook for more than $50 Trillion worth of promised benefits to these individuals; these are benefits promised that the government does not have the money to pay. Social Security and Medicare in their current form are unsustainable and the current system requires a total transformation. It’s time for financial well-being and medical care to be put back into the hands of the individual. Those 50 years and older, if they choose, may remain a part of a smaller version of the current system (with some reforms) if they feel they may not have enough time to save for retirement due to age. The Heritage Foundation has some tough but effective ways in which to transform this nation’s retirement system:


• Raise the retirement age (currently set to rise to 67 by 2030) by two months each year until it reaches 70, which would allow future seniors an average retirement of 17 years.



• A second option would income-adjust benefits to target needy seniors more effectively. This could be accomplished through "progressive indexing," which would index initial benefit levels for middle-income and upper-income families to price inflation rather than wage growth, eliminating much of the increased Social Security costs driven by higher benefits. This would also target more benefit growth to lower-income retirees. If accompanied by an increase in the retirement age, progressive indexing could eliminate the entire Social Security shortfall.


• Personal accounts by themselves do not reduce the taxpayer liabilities to current seniors. However, if Congress slightly pared back the growth rates of benefits for upcoming retirees and allowed workers to direct a portion of their payroll tax savings into personal retirement accounts, workers could har¬ness enough long-term investment growth to do much better than they can under today's system. This is the most realistic way to fund two genera¬tions of retirement on one generation's payroll tax. Millions of Americans with 401(k) plans and IRAs already understand how even safe investments can grow significantly over several decades


• Congress should reduce the massive Medicare Part B and Part D subsidies for upper-income families. These programs are not social insurance: Enrollees did not earn their benefits with payroll taxes. Rather, they are large subsidies from taxpayers.


• Long-term fundamental reform will likely involve bringing more choice and competition into health care, such as moving Medicare from a defined-benefit system to a defined-contribution system. The Federal Employees Health Benefits Pro¬gram (FEHBP) has held down costs by creating a voucher-type system for fed¬eral employees to purchase coverage from competing health plans that offer differing coverage and costs. By creating more choice and competi¬tion, the FEHBP has held down cost increases and may serve as a model for Medicare reform.


This election year Americans must be willing to hold candidates to the fire on this nation’s most dire issues. We must not fall for business as usual or the talking points and propaganda from the mainstream media. We must be informed and well able to challenge candidates and politicians on a variety of issues that concern us. If the American voter enters the 2010 election armed with commonsense and reason, America may just witness a rare political phenomenon not witnessed since 1994 Republican Revolution and the Reagan landslides: A Conservative Sweep. America would be the better.